Create Collection with "hidden" metadata

There are some kind of collections that I want to create seems not possible to be with a rule, but the underlying metadata must already exists.

Examples,

Interlinear: a collection of all resources where the interlinear feature can be used (i.e. the Hebrew/Greek letter button in a Bible). I created a collection almost matching this but then CUVNP is not included.
Audio book/bible: a collection where if read aloud, a read human narrator can be chosen.

Are there any existing way that these kinds of collections can be created? Else can these features added for users to be able to get these metadata when searching their resources?

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

The metadata that Faithlife create for Interlinears is not available to users. I tag them myself (the Interlinear icon in the toolbar will tell you if Inline/Reverse). The Title of some Interlinears is a give-away. Apostolic Fathers are Monographs. Don't forget Ancient Manuscripts.

Read Aloud also requires discovery and tagging.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038840#Comment_1038840

The metadata that Faithlife create for Interlinears is not available to users. I tag them myself (the Interlinear icon in the toolbar will tell you if Inline/Reverse). The Title of some Interlinears is a give-away. Apostolic Fathers are Monographs. Don't forget Ancient Manuscripts.

+1 for manually tagging Interlinear resources, which includes two Apostolic Father English Monographs (Greek are Ancient Manuscripts)

There are some kind of collections that I want to create seems not possible to be with a rule, but the underlying metadata must already exists.

Another example is Morphology

Keep Smiling [:)]

Kolen Cheung

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038843#Comment_1038843

+1 for manually tagging Interlinear resources, which includes two Apostolic Father English Monographs (Greek are Ancient Manuscripts)

FYI this is the rule I created for collection

{CommunityTag "interlinear"} OR (interlinear ANDNOT (Type:Manual OR abbrev:(TR1550MR,TgNmg)))

which is almost correct except it doesn’t include CUVNP.

Note that the first community-tag is not necessary—in my collection with or without such makes no difference. It is for future-proof as the community might tag resources with such tag to resources not covered in the later part of search.

It is interesting to see a search of “interlinear” results in most of the interlinear resources (except CUVNP to me) plus some false alarms. Close inspection shows that for some resources the word “interlinear” doesn’t show up in any places of the “surface” metadata, like not in title, tag, community tag, etc. But the resource showed up none the less. So it seems there’s some hidden metadata the library search has picked up, and yet not totally picked up (because there’s hit and miss.)

P.S. this collection is made public under the name "Interlinear".

Mark Barnes

There are some kind of collections that I want to create seems not possible to be with a rule, but the underlying metadata must already exists.

Examples,

Interlinear: a collection of all resources where the interlinear feature can be used (i.e. the Hebrew/Greek letter button in a Bible). I created a collection almost matching this but then CUVNP is not included.

Audio book/bible: a collection where if read aloud, a read human narrator can be chosen.

Are there any existing way that these kinds of collections can be created? Else can these features added for users to be able to get these metadata when searching their resources?

I've requested this several times. The thread (including some reasons why it hasn't yet been done) is here: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/70687.aspx

Mark Barnes

I forgot to add that you can use my LogosResourcesGuide website to see traits, if you wish. There's no pagination on the site, so it's doesn't handle major traits like 'support-bible'. But it's not bad for the sort of things you've requested. Look for has reverse interlinear, or audio-target:* for books that support read aloud.

Kolen Cheung

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1039021#Comment_1039021

I forgot to add that you can use my LogosResourcesGuide website to see traits, if you wish. There's no pagination on the site, so it's doesn't handle major traits like 'support-bible'. But it's not bad for the sort of things you've requested. Look for has reverse interlinear, or audio-target:* for books that support read aloud.

Thanks. I actually already used that. I saw those metadata from your site, just have no way to slice them in Logos. I guess at the very least one can create such "collection" by querying the db directly and then comparing that result to the empirical collection created in Logos and see if they equals. The practical problem I have is that I've no way to confirm the collection I created hasn't missed anything.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1039059#Comment_1039059

The practical problem I have is that I've no way to confirm the collection I created hasn't missed anything.

With a SQlite Browser that will filter values, you can compare Traits to Titles and/or your User Tags (in the Catalog db) e.g. filter Availability on 2, filter Traits on has-reverse-interlinear and check against Title.

There isn't a simple Trait for Inline Interlinears, but your collection rule is reasonable as it misses nothing. It includes two Reverse Interlinears (LES, LES Alt) and two Interactives that you also might want to exclude. This is where tagging is preferable, as it makes for a simple collection rule e.g. mytag:Interlinear, and mytag:RevInt.

Kolen Cheung

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1039998#Comment_1039998

This is where tagging is preferable, as it makes for a simple collection rule e.g. mytag:Interlinear, and mytag:RevInt.

I've done away manual tagging except for PBB (which is a manual process anyway).

After upgrading generations of Logos one after another, I find the most painful experience is to go through all the new resources to rate and tag them. Essentially every time one buy a new bundle, it's an O(n) process to reorganize the whole library (in practice it is worse than O(n) because it is getting more difficult to organize and back track and so.) So this time when I upgrade to Logos 8 I decided to completely rework my collections and tags and ratings (where the later 2 is gone) and make them totally metadata driven.

(One might say tagging and rating new resources are a way to be familiarized with those new resources. I disagree. One have to admit they just won't know all the resources well. What to do with a book unheard of? Research into it and tag and rate? That won't work if you're doing thousands of them. Manual tagging and rating is just making inaccurate assessment of a resource and move on.)

And actually much can be learnt from the metadata of a new resource.

(People might also question what if the metadata is wrong. But then those tagged personally can also be wrong, and has a higher chance to be wrong than official/community ones.)

Because of this I found that community tags and ratings are incredibly useful. Yes they might not be correct, but again its quality is generally better than personal tagging done quickly (I agree with occasional resources that one really knows well about, their own tagging can be more accurate.) In general I trust Logos' metadata, then communities', then personal ones decreasingly in that other. (With community tag one has to get a sample of stuffs you're looking for in a collection and then see the common tags, and use a bunch of similar ones together to cover the "whole spectrum".)

Also exactly because of this I started to think about writing to the db directly to make use of hidden metadata (that exist but not normally exposed for use in search syntax). This is something many people, official or unofficial, strongly discouraged. I'm quite surprised by these reactions, as if we're from a different world. That's unfortunate but it just means I can't expect help from this forum on this matter.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040017#Comment_1040017

Your collection rule {CommunityTag "interlinear"} OR (interlinear ANDNOT (Type:Manual OR abbrev:(TR1550MR,TgNmg))) is driven by the unqualified term interlinear, which comes from Faithlife's metadata and their resource Description (which is not metadata). It could also come from your own tagging. The Community Tag had no effect on the result. Interlinears are such a small set that it is worthwhile using your own tags (results are easily verified).

In general I trust Logos' metadata, then communities', then personal ones decreasingly in that other.

I generally start with Faithlife's metadata (not Community) and add Tags if necessary e.g. subject:eschatology OR mytag:eschatology.

Evaluating my resources is ongoing.

Kolen Cheung

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040054#Comment_1040054

Your collection rule {CommunityTag "interlinear"} OR (interlinear ANDNOT (Type:Manual OR abbrev:(TR1550MR,TgNmg))) is driven by the unqualified term interlinear, which comes from Faithlife's metadata and their resource Description (which is not metadata). It could also come from your own tagging. The Community Tag had no effect on the result. Interlinears are such a small set that it is worthwhile using your own tags (results are easily verified).

In general I trust Logos' metadata, then communities', then personal ones decreasingly in that other.

I generally start with Faithlife's metadata (not Community) and add Tags if necessary e.g. subject:eschatology OR mytag:eschatology.

Evaluating my resources is ongoing.

Yes, I also explained that when I post that rule. And no, I have absolutely no metadata at all. And the inclusion of the community tag is for future proof, the choice of that tag is from sampling of known interlinear resources and read its community tag.

I agree evaluating resources is ongoing. But I don't think tag is the answer. I really want to have a text box in the info to put in notes for descriptions. In the past I abused the tag to put notes, having tags that's sentence long. I now fully migrated away from that. Given the limitation I now created a bibliography and put notes to resources there. It isn't pretty but until Logos provides a way to attach a user description to a resource it's the only way, probably.

In my current workflow I have no tag and rating for non-PBB titles. And I'm forcing myself to keep it that way. (Especially now that search syntax support collection, the traditional kind of tagging can all be done using collections. Ratings is not useful at all since from another thread I found my own rating is in 100% agreement with the community one on what considered to be bad resources: https://community.logos.com/forums/p/179259/1035867.aspx . Sadly from the response there no one seem to understand what I was doing.)

Kolen Cheung

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040065#Comment_1040065

I use the trait (which is not exposed normally but is part of the hidden metadata "trait") to create a collection of reverse interlinear and I've found out the rule I used above missed about half of the titles that has reverse interlinear.

The collection is shared publicly under the name "Trait—has-reverse-interlinear". (It is not perfect because it is limited by the features Logos currently offered and specifically uses a title search. It includes "中文聖經和合本修訂版（上帝版．繁體）" for example, although its reverse interlinear feature is only in pre-pub but isn't available yet. Not to mention for some titles one might owned, but not have the license to access the reverse interlinear.)

Kolen Cheung

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040065#Comment_1040065